2014 Oscar Predictions

Our predictions will follow this overview of the 2014 Oscar nominations. “Gravity” is gonna get most of the awards this year, and I won’t dwell on it except to say I love going to the circus. The lion tamer (George Clooney) is always entertaining, handsome and heroic, but it’s the high wire act of Sandra Bullock that gets the ooos and ahhhs. I go to the circus about once a year and that’s gracious plenty. There’s nothing complicated or interesting about the circus, but it’s damned fun and the kid will love it.

The Academy’s nominations included no outstanding film for 2013. “American Hustle” had the best plotline and could’ve been called “Argot Part II” for its pressure cooker pacing and 1970s depiction of government conspiracy. Christian Bale is always good and Amy Adams will continue to impress with more than her breasts, tho she uses them ably to communicate both innocence and sexual prowess. “Dallas Buyers Club” endeared us to a Texas cowboy whose epiphanies were genuine and had nothing to do with politics for a change. Matthew McConaughey lost 45 lbs for his part, and his acting, with both sensitivity and redneckness, makes him a shoein for Best Actor this year. “Her” was the only film to break any barriers in this year’s line-up what with the tender depiction of a sexbot’s cavorting and lustful diabolicism. Spike Jonze’s idea of the next generation’s online dating scene seems not just feasible but inevitable. As far as the Academy’s nod toward the independent scene, they fall short again. I’d ask the academy to stop patting themselves on the back for pawning off their idea of an indy film – “Nebraska” was a B-movie masquerading as indy, sincere and funny as it was. “Captain Phillips” was nominated, of course, because of Tom Hanks and because pirates are interesting. Our modern day Jimmy Stewart does not make a bad movie. Finally, because the academy is mostly actors who started out on stage effecting British accents, the wordy and entertaining Philomena comes in strong. Is it possible to go a year without nominating Judi Dench or Meryl Streep for an award?

Now let’s talk about the Best Picture award. Many pundits suggest the academy’s split decision for Best Picture could result in the inferior “12 Years a Slave” as winner, a movie tackling our country’s biggest stain that is slavery. It won’t win. The gratuitous violence and endless flogging in “12 Years a Slave” disqualifies this biopic for the same reason that “The Wolf of Wall Street” should be dismissed outright because of its gratuitous depiction of indulgent sex, drugs and greed. They’re unbalanced films. Perhaps there’s no balance because the subjects are appalling and the good in slavery and the good in criminal capitalism are not worthy of positive depiction. But I appreciate that Scorsese’s “The Wolf of Wall Street” did, at least, tease the viewer into seeing the evil protagonist something of a role model. Surely nobody thinks huffing coke off the tanned asses of hookers is something to celebrate – or wrecking Lamborghinis, surviving yacht wrecks and finding redemption on the tennis courts of white collar jails are things we should aspire toward? Oh, I see what Scorsese did there … very clever, Martin. But the subject of American slavery allows for no such indulgences. Not after movies like “Gone With The Wind” stupidly celebrated slavery’s beneficiaries without portraying slavery’s horrors. “12 Years a Slave” is not interesting precisely because there is no attempt to depict the enemy within us all – human indulgence in repressing others. Slavery shown as pure evil is morally correct but factually flawed. We must entertain that all of us have potential to be slave masters. Think “Shindler’s List”.

But the bigger problem with “12 Years a Slave” was that nobody liked the film but for the brilliant portrayal of pure evil and its consequences by the master actor Michael Fassbender.

But even the expert acting of Michael Fassbender and the black slave he flogs, portrayed by Lupita Nyong’o, won’t make us like the movie. Gravity wins.

Clients served:

Popular Posts

The tech world is full of bullying in the workplace. Strategists revere Oracle’s Larry Ellison for alienating workers and customers to the tune of billions in annual revenues. Thanks to Hollywood, we’ve seen how Mark Zuckerberg acted during the early days of Facebook. Mark Pincus, CEO of Zynga, even boasted about the horrible things he did to get ahead and how fabulous his business became because of it. Despite all the politically correct rhetoric, it would appear big tech doesn’t really want to get rid of their bullies – they’re too profitable. That’s why those who work for them need to take a more measured approach: If you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t – better to go somewhere else. A few years ago my co-worker told me there were two paths to take with our bullying boss: “You’re his bootlicker or enemy.” But my success had little to do with blandishments and flattery for bosses. I had more

These free web design optimization tools are available for use and should be used in conjunction with a good Web Design and Marketing Strategy. Website Management Subscription Services sometime offer these as a subscription model because the nature of Search Engine Optimization and the implementation of the technology changes periodically. The ability to have success in searches depends on a great deal of research and time spent creating the content on pages and posts. More than anything else, research and implementation are the two components to finding success when using these free web design optimization tools. It’s worth remembering that many of these resources require a fair bit of experience and technical knowledge, so consider hiring a website manager to help. The Best Free Web Design Optimization Tools WordStream Keyword/phrase Tool: Keyword/Keyphrase Usage WordStream Niche Finder: get keyword suggestions grouped semantically SEO Book Keyword/phrase Suggestion Tool: A useful way of developing new keywords Google Keyword/phrase Tool: Get it from the more

The Internet started as an anything-goes place for design expression, a place where web designers could try out flavors of communication, then evolve useability standards in unique ways. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s there was a sense of progression both organic and accepting. Failure was measured in terms of not trying. There were no standards, so that web designers could try anything. Today, the commodity that is web design has turned against experimental design in favor of prefabricated templates based on compatibility with Drupal, Joomla and WordPress. Too often, “good design” is based on the generic website design: Social media icons, search box, menu, slider, blog section and footers. We web designers should celebrate the innovators who break with standards and innovate interface. 1980s web designs During the peak of the nylon era, the Internet was a network of primitive university and government servers hosting mostly static HTML pages. Design involved blinking buttons embedded in bordered tables displaying shouting fonts more

The formula for building a successful digital presence has changed. No matter how much money is spent on a website, having a website is not enough. A failed marketer is one who builds a website to separate the company from the crowd rather than to unite it with the common market. By allocating too much time and too many resources on branding and usability, many website managers continue to fail in delivering new customers and in servicing existing ones because they’ve built little more than a static digital magazine peddling a service the website does little to support. When nobody bothers to visit, website managers can have a hard time explaining why. Your website is good for only three things Unless there’s some business functionality built into your website, users are not visiting to read marketing copy and look at your graceful UI. Instead, there’s only three things they are doing: 1.) troubleshooting 2.) contacting someone 3.) signing up for more

“When assholes succeed,” Bob Sutton argues, “they usually do so despite their negative traits not because of them.” Sutton’s Good Boss, Bad Boss begs the question whether it’s worth any company’s bottom line to tolerate jerks. Steve Jobs was a well known bully tolerated for his genius and bottom line results returned for Apple, but let’s not forget Jobs was fired from Apple for being “famously combative”. The company lost millions because of him before making billions despite his antics. After his own combative 17 months portraying himself as an all-knowing savior of the department store, JC Penny CEO Ron Johnson was fired on April 9th. Business Insider saw this coming long before the board of directors did, calling him the wrong man for the wrong job back in October 2012: Make no mistake: Ron Johnson is in the midst of the retail disaster of the decade. His arrogance will cost thousands of people their jobs while destroying “America’s Favorite more

Twitter once offered relaxed rules to encourage growth, but their massive expansion has recently led to bandwidth troubles and a paranoia about who Tweets where. Over the summer, new rules took effect not only to keep spammers, scrapers and bots at bay, but to prevent criminal and user bullying activity. An in-Tweet report button and updated Twitter Rules we accept, but their ongoing API Authentication protocol revisions are a pain in the arse. Website managers are in a constant scramble to update failing Twitter feeds. While API authentication effectively bans abusive users, it also aggravates the technology used to integrate Tweets. WordPress aficionado Jonas Kaufmann expressed his frustration: “If you can view the tweets of a person without being logged in on any computer, why should a bot not be able to do the same? I’m one of the first users asking this question and I guarantee you, I will find a solution, post it in the OP and within more

Let us, for a moment, draw comparisons between U.S. Internet service providers and U.S. bank lenders. Both data providers and lenders wield great power to influence productivity and economy. Chicago Tribute columnist Phil Rosenthal went so far to suggest that a lack of net-neutrality could make the rich richer and the poor poorer by allowing data providers to squeeze customers, charging variable rates that would inevitably cause poorer customers to suffer. A similar thinking goes that unchecked U.S. bank lenders would tend toward lending discrimination which would deny loans to groups of people based on socioeconomic limitations. Net-neutrality advocates want the government to enforce fairness in data distribution in a similar manner that the government regulates banks to ensure all classes have access to equal lending practices. There was a time when no mandate was in place for the government to regulate the banking system, but following early twentieth century financial crises, monetary policy regulation became a priority for U.S. more

Fresh in the memories of airline travelers are the new fees charged to check luggage through to destinations. First appalled, then angered and finally resolved, travelers watched as American Airlines set the precedent and other airlines jumped on board. A similar trend is emerging among popular social networking websites, specifically, charging for a service we’ve all taken for granted: free messaging to other users. Their representatives claim the new fees provide a means to reduce SPAM and prevent overfull in boxes. While LinkedIn.com has long required annual fees of a minimum $39.95 per year for users to send unrestricted messages to others outside their linked network, a wild rumor serviced in January from the absurdest online tabloid The Weekly World News that Facebook will start charging fees to use the service: According to sources outside the company, Facebook is planning a subscription-based service with monthly fees starting at $0.99 for a basic “friendship” which allows for the posting of text more

Our predictions will follow this overview of the 2014 Oscar nominations. “Gravity” is gonna get most of the awards this year, and I won’t dwell on it except to say I love going to the circus. The lion tamer (George Clooney) is always entertaining, handsome and heroic, but it’s the high wire act of Sandra Bullock that gets the ooos and ahhhs. I go to the circus about once a year and that’s gracious plenty. There’s nothing complicated or interesting about the circus, but it’s damned fun and the kid will love it. The Academy’s nominations included no outstanding film for 2013. “American Hustle” had the best plotline and could’ve been called “Argot Part II” for its pressure cooker pacing and 1970s depiction of government conspiracy. Christian Bale is always good and Amy Adams will continue to impress with more than her breasts, tho she uses them ably to communicate both innocence and sexual prowess. “Dallas Buyers Club” endeared us more

Stock photography allows branders and marketers to introduce what many agree are the four basic marketing emotions that get people to pay attention to an advertisement: Greed (75% off!), Vanity (Be the best!), Exclusivity (Limited edition!) and Emotion (Don’t lose in life!). Companies like Apple elicit exclusivity when new hardware flies off the shelf. The sports equipment industry knows that vanity is the great motivator for selling their products and major grocery chains rarely veer from catering to customers’ greed. Now, representatives from two of the richest media companies, Facebook and Getty Images, have teamed up in an attempt to force marketers to diversify their imaging strategy by stymieing the emotional female fear-mongering advertisement. Their message has more to do with the desire for marketers to diversify which emotions they are eliciting when portraying images of women. But marketing professionals are unlikely to respond unless positive emotion can outsell the negative. “Negativity is the backbone of the media. Negativity makes more

The South Asian head bobble has its roots in British colonialism when subjects were too afraid a “yes” or “no” answer would contradict the one asking a question. Today’s South Asians are more than willing to contradict you without fear of reprisal, but their cordial manners often hide their true feelings. Innuendo, after all, is where cultural divide wedges itself. Where westerners perceive apathy in an Indian, the conversation should proceed until a firm “yes” can be established. “We’ll try” or “maybe” probably means “no”. And when communicating with anyone from a different culture, one should always avoid sarcasm or implying something. For instance, “Let’s get that project done Friday” will likely delay your project. Instead, “The deadline is Friday for that project” makes it happen. Business conversations between westerners and Asians often break down because sensibilities are insulted by mistake and often without even knowing. Jumping into business before wading through the waters of cordiality is a frequent mistake. more

A young eBay, Inc. led by the young liberal CEO John Donahoe donated loads to the Democratic Party, specifically to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York. Now, Gillibrand’s support of the bill known as the Marketplace Fairness Act, legislation that would ultimately allow states to collect sales tax from online merchants, whether they have operations in that state or not, has put John Donahoe in opposition to the Democratic Party. Donahoe is having that predictable “rich man realization” that comes with making millions. eBay’s sudden political shift to the Right is no coincidence considering their CEO saw his compensation nearly doubled to $29.7 million in 2012 while the company grew 2012 first quarter performance with revenue increasing 18%. Nevertheless, it was a surprise to most of the 84 million eBay members to see eBay’s April 24th email in their spamboxes, signed by John Donahoe: SUBJECT: Tell Congress “No!” to new sales taxes and burdens for small online businesses. BODY: more